From: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
brendanhiggins@google.com, davidgow@google.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
rafael@kernel.org, linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org,
geert@linux-m68k.org, mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com,
davem@davemloft.net, broonie@kernel.org,
skhan@linuxfoundation.org, mptcp@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] kunit: Fix formatting of KUNIT tests to meet the standard
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 16:39:07 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dbe6abeb-0082-e309-1208-9c43c6f127ae@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YHyK+5xJEMcDDhVy@mit.edu>
On 4/18/21 3:39 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 04:58:03AM -0400, Nico Pache wrote:
>> There are few instances of KUNIT tests that are not properly defined.
>> This commit focuses on correcting these issues to match the standard
>> defined in the Documentation.
> The word "standard" seems to be over-stating things. The
> documentation currently states, "they _usually_ have config options
> ending in ``_KUNIT_TEST'' (emphasis mine). I can imagine that there
> might be some useful things we can do from a tooling perspective if we
> do standardize things, but if you really want to make it a "standard",
> we should first update the manpage to say so,
KUNIT Maintainers, should we go ahead and make this the "standard"?
As Ted has stated... consistency with 'grep' is my desired outcome.
> and explain why (e.g.,
> so that we can easily extract out all of the kunit test modules, and
> perhaps paint a vision of what tools might be able to do with such a
> standard).
>
> Alternatively, the word "standard" could perhaps be changed to
> "convention", which I think more accurately defines how things work at
> the moment.Nico Pache (6):
> kunit: ASoC: topology: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard
> kunit: software node: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard
> kunit: ext4: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard
> kunit: lib: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard
> kunit: mptcp: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard
> m68k: update configs to match the proper KUNIT syntax
>
> Also, "adhear" is not the correct spelling; the correct spelling is
> "adhere" (from the Latin verb "adhaerere", "to stick", as in "to hold
> fast or stick by as if by gluing", which then became "to bind oneself
> to the observance of a set of rules or standards or practices").
>
> - Ted
Whoops... Made that mistake in my v1 and inadvertently copied it over
to all the patches.
Cheers!
-- Nico
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-22 20:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-14 8:58 [PATCH v2 0/6] kunit: Fix formatting of KUNIT tests to meet the standard Nico Pache
2021-04-14 8:58 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] kunit: ASoC: topology: adhear to KUNIT formatting standard Nico Pache
2021-04-14 14:20 ` Mark Brown
2021-04-14 8:58 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] kunit: software node: " Nico Pache
2021-04-14 8:58 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] kunit: ext4: " Nico Pache
2021-04-18 19:41 ` Theodore Ts'o
2021-04-14 8:58 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] kunit: lib: " Nico Pache
2021-04-14 8:58 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] kunit: mptcp: " Nico Pache
2021-04-14 9:25 ` Matthieu Baerts
2021-04-15 6:01 ` David Gow
2021-04-15 7:10 ` Matthieu Baerts
2021-04-17 4:24 ` David Gow
2021-04-17 8:02 ` Matthieu Baerts
2021-04-19 7:40 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2021-04-14 8:58 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] m68k: update configs to match the proper KUNIT syntax Nico Pache
2021-04-14 16:06 ` (subset) [PATCH v2 0/6] kunit: Fix formatting of KUNIT tests to meet the standard Mark Brown
2021-04-18 19:39 ` Theodore Ts'o
2021-04-22 20:39 ` Nico Pache [this message]
2021-04-23 6:26 ` David Gow
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=dbe6abeb-0082-e309-1208-9c43c6f127ae@redhat.com \
--to=npache@redhat.com \
--cc=brendanhiggins@google.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=davidgow@google.com \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com \
--cc=mptcp@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).